Indesign Pagesnew.indd - Azim Premji Foundation

limits the ability of students to challenge her, to engage in a
meaningful dialogue and to see the world through different
lenses. The social sciences lend themselves to argument,
debate and opinion – and by choosing to simply referee
students’ ideas, the teacher does not model the passion
and enthusiasm that these subjects have the ability to
invoke. Finally, it is arguable that it is necessary at times
for a teacher to intervene, in order to “counter massive
prejudice” (Ashton, E. & Watson, B. 1998. p88), ‘Values
Education: a fresh look at procedural neutrality’, Educational
Studies, 24 (2), 83-193). Arguments that promote violence
or social injustice may well emerge within the classroom. It
is important to explore these arguments rather than shut
students down. However, it is irresponsible, on the pretext
of teacher neutrality, to leave these views hanging in the
classroom either.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Section C
Does Neutral = Controversial?
None of these arguments preclude the fact that by stating her
own perspectives, the teacher may well infl uence students’
independent thought processes – students may imbibe the
teacher’s views unintentionally or they may choose to align
their views with her simply because they have a positive
relationship with her. Conversely, it may be that students take
on an opposing viewpoint to their teacher simply because
they have a negative relationship with her. The stance that
teachers should take in the classroom is therefore one that
still instigates controversy. In my classroom I chose to
be honest with students and lay out my assumptions and
perspectives, hoping that we had a classroom culture that
allowed students to freely express themselves too. I still
think about this issue – and I wonder to what extent my
approach truly promoted independent thought and enquiry.
Ashton, E. & Watson, B. (1998), ‘Values Education: a fresh look at procedural neutrality’, Educational Studies, 24 (2), 83-193
Cotton, D.R.E (2006). Teaching controversial environmental issues: neutrality and balance in the reality of the classroom.
Educational Research, 48 (2) 223 – 241
Kelly, T. E. (1986). Discussing controversial issues: Four perspectives on the teacher’s role. Theory and Research in Social
Education, 14, 113–138
Kelly, D. M., & Brandes, G. M. (2001). Shifting Out of Neutral: Beginning Teachers’ Struggles with Teaching for Social Justice.
Canadian Journal of Education. 26(4) 437-454
Oulton, C., Day, V., Dillon, J. and Grace, M. (2004) Controversial Issues - teachers’ attitudes and practices in the context of
citizenship education. Oxford Review of Education, 30 (4), 489-508
Mangala Nanda studied history at the University of Cambridge. Following this she taught history in an
inner-city London school. She now works in the Academics and Pedagogy team at Azim Premji Foundation.
She may be contacted at mangala@azimpremjifoundation.org
Pg No: 93